Minister of International Development Harjit Sajjan prepares to appear at the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, studying the government's response to the final report on the Special Committee on Afghanistan, in Ottawa, on April 26, 2023.Justin Tang/The Canadian Press
Mission status
Re “Harjit Sajjan failed Canada, and Canadians” (Editorial, July 2): In the name of simple common sense, when is the Prime Minister going to finally remove Harjit Sajjan from cabinet? He previously has cut loose two or three decent ministers with far less evidence of mismanagement.
Mr. Sajjan has not held one single position where I have not seen questionable behaviour, poor judgment, skirting the truth or all of the above. Even more disturbing to me is that he references his experience in the Canadian Armed Forces, when this example should be considered one more that sullies him not only as a minister, but also as a former officer.
Paul Thomson Loyalist, Ont.
After the disastrous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, I wrote to my MP and sharply criticized the lack of concern evinced by Canada to rescue from the Taliban those Afghans who had loyally served Canada as translators and in other capacities.
Not surprisingly, I received no reply. The neglect continued.
This abject failure is now partly explained by Harjit Sajjan’s instructions. Unforgivable.
John Edmond Ottawa
Sikhs have been in Canada for more than a century. They have faced racism ever since putting foot on this land. The Komagata Maru steamship incident of 1914 is a prime example of this.
In spite of covert and overt racism, they have learned to live with it. They have worked hard to reach where they are today financially, economically, socially and, above all, politically. They are working vigorously to prove that Canada is their home, and that they are an integral part of it.
Sikh leaders of all political stripes, along with mainstream political leaders, encounter criticism from time to time because of missteps and mistakes. Constructive criticism will help them realize when a mistake has been made and learn from it.
Harjit Sajjan should be no exception. Where he is today is the result of that long evolving process.
Let’s not make a mountain out of a molehill.
Kalwant Singh Sahota Delta, B.C.
Hard work
Re “Canada is an oasis of peace worth the work” (Editorial, July 1): It’s a pity, then, that I hear moralizing and catastrophizing as seems typical of those whose favourite issue is perpetually the crisis of the day, and therefore must take precedence over all others.
Not every issue over which Canadians disagree is a crisis; not every disagreement is a culture war; not every clash of cultural values is worth rage and violence. In Canada, there should be no need for violent confrontations of any kind.
There are, perhaps, some who inevitably rank their crisis, disagreements and values more highly than those of others. This, I think, is a result of genuine or willful ignorance, and a naive wish to see only one single issue instead of the vast, interconnected and complex set of compromises that Canadians seem pretty good at managing.
Nancy Bjerring London, Ont.
Free rein
Re “The Supreme Court has just removed the last bar to Trump’s dictatorship” (July 3): “There’s a word for a system of thought that cannot abide any limit on the power of the leader.”
A 2021 short essay by the Law Society of British Columbia advises us that, essentially, the term for such an arbitrary system is “rule by law.” In a nutshell, it’s the complete opposite of the rule of law.
Jeff Wright Belleville, Ont.
The U.S. Supreme Court is composed of appointed legal officials whom I see as insulated and relatively isolated; the U.S. president is that country’s top elected official. Why would a non-elected body of legal officials impinge on the democratic process?
Joe Biden should, with those remaining living former presidents, serve notice against the ruling. If they deem necessary, file a legal brief against the court.
Robert Marcucci Toronto
With this ruling, Americans can probably look forward to shorter presidential inaugurations, since the now-inoperative parts of the oath of office can be cut.
I’m thinking here of the bit where presidents used to swear to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Graham White Toronto
Legal stakes
Re “Alleged serial fraudster escaped justice with collapse of three cases” (July 1): “Crowns don’t want to take risks. They want to win. If they don’t win it looks bad on them.” As a retired Crown prosecutor, I say this in reply: Wrong.
The Crown does not win or lose. And it takes more legal guts to drop a charge that cannot succeed for legal reason than it does to proceed to prosecute anyway, just to avoid such criticism.
Henry Van Drunen Stratford, Ont.
Could the Crown losing a case turn out worse than the actual outcome of destroyed lives, murder and loss of faith in the justice system? Any Crown should be hesitant before putting their egos and track record ahead of doing what they are paid to do.
The lack of tenacity demonstrated to the alleged fraudster that it would be easy to bulldoze his way out through the stack of paper charges. Repeatedly.
Bill Bousada Carleton Place, Ont.
What’s it worth?
Re “The law should treat personal data like human organs – not for sale” (Report on Business, June 26): Self-sovereignty or ownership of our data is a salient point. For each of us, personal data are individual assets, to do with as we see fit within the law.
However, there’s a subtle but consequential distinction between ticking company boxes for their manipulation versus companies ticking our boxes for their utilization. In other words, we can give permission for others to use our data. This mirrors zero-knowledge services, where only the minimum information necessary is granted in identity requirements.
Individual data generally have less value than aggregated data. Data have been referred to as “the new oil.” That being the case, we are all wealthier than we realize.
In the end, it should be imperative that we engage the internet as a tool for human betterment. This, too, paves the way to vitally important considerations surrounding the advancement of artificial intelligence.
Lyn Brooks Vancouver
Blast from the past
Re “The best part about my high-school reunion? We related better as adults” (First Person, July 2): Please, no more reminders that 1984 was 40 years ago. Thank you.
Keith McKee London, Ont.
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com